629-3 Classic VS, Ruger Redhawk?

[fighter62]

How would You compare a pre lock/mim 629-3 Classic five inch barrel with a five inch barrel Ruger Redhawk 44?

 

[okie john]

The Smith is a well-made, accurate sixgun that is ready to go right out of the box. Hot loads, especially with 300-grain bullets, should be kept to a minimum, but it's a great choice for everything else.

If you shoot hot loads, the Ruger is as strong as a battleship anchor. It also handles like a battleship anchor and feels like a battleship anchor on your belt. With some tuning, it can have an excellent trigger, but its real calling card is strength and durability.


Okie John

 

[WHO CARES]

Just like okie john said!!!!

Redhawks may cost a little less and that can be a plus. You will have to accomplish some trigger work on the Redhawk or suffer the consequences. This 629 has the endurance package and if you aren't going to be shooting silly wet or something that requires lots of very heavy bullets and loads it shouldn't give any problems.

5" Classics sure do feel nice in the hand - can't say that about the RH - at least that's my opinion.

Ward

 

[Nframe357]

It depends on how you plan on using it, if you want a range toy that will get shot a few times a year grab the Smith. If you want 44 that you can fire almost forever get the Ruger. I've had RH's and they were all just as accurate as any 629 that I've fired, and ALOT stronger. Think of it like this, the 629 is a corvette, fast, fun but delicate. The RH is a Abrams tank, clunky, tough and it doesn't handle as well but it takes a whole lot more to put it out of aciton.

 

[Marshall 357]

Get both and dont worry about it!

 

[.460V & XVR Magnum Man]

I have both and it is exactly as Nframe357 said, couldn't be explained any better. So you are just gonna have to get them both!!

 

[Revolver-time]

The guys have said it all. The Redhawk is way overbuilt for the puny 44 mag. The Smith is good for standard loads and is so smooth it will spoil ya pretty quick. Smiths are like real pretty women.......... They take a bit more maintenance.

I have both and the Smith mostly sits there and looks pretty.

 

[roaddog28]

The 629 for the range and to look at. The Redhawk for a camping/hunting revolver. The Redhawk will take any 44 mag whether factory or hand loaded. And again the Redhawk is built like a tank. Depending on the Redhawk you choose the trigger can be good or a little heavy and griddy sometimes. Shop around and handle more than one Redhawk. The Smith 629 will have a better trigger out of the box than the Redhawk.

Both are great revolvers. But I feel they each have a different purpose.

Good luck,
roaddog28

 

[mtgianni]

My redhawk outshot my 6 1/2" 624 by enough of a margin that it went down the road.

 

[David Sinko]

I own both. The Redhawk is "overbuilt" only in regard to the barrel and frame. The internals are an embarassment. I have so far managed to break two hammer links and wear out a transfer bar in my Redhawk. I shot thousands of rounds through this Redhawk and dry fired it tens of thousands of times more to wear it out, which is more than most people will ever do to one. It is a custom gun, and Ruger refused to fix it, so getting it back into shooting condition was a nightmare. Ruger does not sell hammers or triggers to anybody, so this is something you will need to keep in mind. The transfer bars were also quietly redesigned and newer transfer bars will not function properly in some older revolvers. All I know is I will never again buy another Redhawk. The 629 is easier to maintain due to its abundance of spare parts. Knowing what I do now, I'd choose the 629 over a Redhawk every time.

Dave Sinko

 

[fighter62]

Interesting info. My Department had both Model 66's and Speed Six in the 80's. Speed Six held up MUCH better. I thought the same was true for 44's.

 

[stantheman86]

I prefer the Ruger Super Redhawk, it's basically a GP100 on steroids. The standard Redhawk is different internally. The Super RH was designed to correct some issues with the Redhawk and Ruger even considered dropping the RH in favor of the SRH but both are so popular for now they are keeping them both in production. The SRH is way overbuilt for .44 Magnum, given the fact that they build the .454 and .480 on this frame.

I wanted one "heavy shooter" for .44 Magnum and I went with a 9.5" Super Redhawk and I feel it will fill the bill nicely.

S&W's are swiss watches and are great shooters, but will begin to wear sooner. Rugers are made as rugged field revolvers and may give up a little bit of accuracy over the Smith, but not enough for most shooters to notice. There's a reason why the ultra heavy loads in the handloading books are marked "Ruger and Freedom Arms only" The stout loads that would eventually shoot a S&W loose are easily absorbed by the Rugers.

 

[Hammerdown77]

I just recently bought a 629-4, and I love this gun. I have a lot of Rugers, but this is my first S&W. I will say, the fit and finish of the S&W is far and beyond my Rugers, other than maybe my Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. When I showed the gun to my Dad that was the first thing he said as well, "Wow, this gun looks like it was hand fit, and the lockwork is very precise."

I don't really need to shoot anything beyond factory full-house .44 mag loads, and it should handle those all day long. I've got a .45 Colt and the SBH Hunter in .44 mag if I wanna get silly with handloads. 1100-1200 fps with a 250 grain Keith bullet in .44 mag is fine by me.

 

[Wayne M]

I like the Redhawk much better than the Super Redhawk(just don't like to look at it I guess) but I'll take the 629 Classic for any purpose over either one. As I mentioned in another thread my 8 3/8" Classic(-4, an early one) is somewhere between 11K and 12K rounds of reloads(all cast maggies) with no problems. I've got parts just because you gotta have parts but it's never needed a single one. Once you drop back in time before the Smith endurance guns came out some moderation may be prudent.

The Redhawk may or may not outlast the Classic and individual cases don't necessarily prove or disprove anything but I haven't got enough time left around here to prove or disprove it to myself. 629, thank you very much!

 

[zorba]

The superior strength of the Ruger Redhawk compared to the S&W 629 has been way overemphasized, IMO. The Ruger is probably somewhat stronger, but the brass case is the weakest link in either revolver. If you were to decide to keep increasing the powder charge in your .44 Mag past the SAAMI maximum limit in your .44 Mag until you run into a problem, you would quickly reach the point where the cases stick and are very difficult to extract. At that point you are beyond any reasonable, safe, or practical limit. The Ruger may be a little stronger, but it doesn't make any real difference. It is the strength of the case that sets the pressure limit.

Some people refer to the "Ruger and Contender Only" section in the reloading manuals as proof that the Ruger is safer and stronger than the Smith. But in the manuals I have seen, the "Ruger and Contender Only" section is only for the .45 Colt, not for the .44 Mag. This is to warn shooters not to use these loads in an older Colt SAA or in one of its many clones. IIRC, not many S&W 629's (except maybe a few mountain guns) have been made in .45 Colt.

In 1985, special ordered a Redhawk. When it finally arrived at the gun shop, the owner said with a big smile, "Your revolver has the best trigger I have ever felt on a Redhawk." After I dry fired it a few times, I agreed. At local matches , I would set up a table for a long line of rubes who would pay a dollar each just to experience one dry fire let off with that excellent trigger.

But I wanted a true match quality trigger, so I took it to the most talented pistolsmith in the area. When I got it back a month later, the trigger pull was much improved. It was far better than any other Redhawk which I had ever held. I began charging the rubes at the local matches $2.00 each to try my trigger.

But no matter how many different loads I tried, I couldn't get that Redhawk to shoot good groups. So I sold it and bought a S&W 629.
Right out of the box, the 629 had a much better trigger then my former Redhawk, and the 629 shot much better groups as well.

Ruger and S&W both make high quality revolvers that usually shoot well, but I have never found any practical advantages in the alleged greater strength of Ruger revolvers. Of course, YMMV.